Psychiatry: The Hoax Exposed

It’s no secret that at the present time, psychiatry is reeling under a barrage of scrutiny and criticism. Their long-standing contention that all significant problems of thinking, feeling, and/or behaving are brain illnesses “just like diabetes,” which need to be “treated” with drugs and high-voltage electric shocks to the brain, has been thoroughly discredited. And yet they go on peddling their spurious, self-serving ideology and the products of their pharma partners.

The great mystery in all of this is why has the mainstream media been so slow to pick up the story. This is the greatest hoax in history being played out right under our noses. People’s lives are being destroyed, and our cultural resilience is being systematically eroded by psychiatric “diagnoses” and “treatments”. In recent years, we have seen some increase in media scrutiny, but it’s been relatively circumscribed, and way outnumbered by the media’s faithful regurgitation of pharma-psychiatry’s press releases, extolling the latest “great breakthrough” in the “treatment of brain illnesses”.

The article is a plain-spoken, no-holds-barred attack on psychiatric research and practice. Here are some quotes:

“More than 80 million prescriptions for psychiatric drugs are written in the UK every year. Not only are these drugs often entirely unnecessary and ineffective, but they can also turn patients into addicts, cause crippling side-effects – and kill.”

“And the death toll from these pills has been grossly underestimated. As I reveal in a new book, Deadly Psychiatry And Organised Denial, the true figure is terrifying: according to my calculations, based on data from published and unpublished sources, psychiatric drugs are the third major killer after heart disease and cancer.”

“…for instance, finding that the number of suicides among adults and children taking antidepressant drugs is actually 15 times greater than the number calculated by the U.S. drugs watchdog, the Food and Drug Administration.”

“Just this month, for instance, a study published in the BMJ found that thousands of people in England with learning difficulties are routinely prescribed antipsychotic drugs: these drugs do nothing to help these patients but are used as a chemical cosh.”

“…antipsychotics are licensed if they show an effect in two placebo trials, no matter how small that effect is.”

“…an analysis of trials by Cochrane Collaboration [a global independent network of researchers, professionals, patients, carers, and people interested in health] found that when the placebo was designed to cause similar side-effects to the drug, the psychiatrists reported just as good results from both groups.”

“Based on the same sort of flawed trials, antidepressants are also being handed out for conditions such as binge eating, panic disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder and menopausal symptoms.”

“The claimed benefits can be ludicrously small, for instance: they cut the rate of hot flushes from ten to nine a day.”

“Most of us could get one or more psychiatric diagnoses if we consulted a psychiatrist or GP.”

“When they try to come off the pills and experience very unpleasant side-effects, patients say they are told their symptoms are the result of their illness coming back.

This ignores the fact that the drugs’ withdrawal effects can mimic the symptoms of psychiatric disorders. It also doesn’t fit in with what happens when patients in desperation reach for the drugs again: within a few hours they can be feeling better. Real depression doesn’t fade that fast.”

“My proposal is to start a campaign to Just Say No – it is time for a war on psychiatric drugs.”

Everything in the article will be familiar to those of us on this side of the issue. Indeed, I think it will be familiar to psychiatrists also, but they allow self-interest to dull their critical faculties.

But the important point is that this hard-hitting, outspoken piece is being run by the Daily Mail, Britain’s second largest print daily newspaper, and its largest online newspaper!

In an addendum to the article, there is a personal account by Luke Montagu, heir to the Earl of Sandwich. Luke recounts that when he was 19, he had a sinus operation that left him with headaches and “a sense of distance from the world”. His GP told him – guess what? – that he had a chemical imbalance in his brain!

Luke describes briefly but convincingly his experiences with psychiatrists and other doctors over the next 25 years. He finally managed to taper off the drugs, and describes the detox as “…nearly seven years of hell”. Then:

“About three years ago, I very slowly began to recover. I still have a burning pins and needles sensation throughout my body, loud tinnitus and a feeling of intense agitation.

But my mind is back, and I’m determined to try to help others avoid this terrible trap.”

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Again, all, or most, of the material here is familiar to us, but it’s extremely well put together, and Luke Montagu’s personal struggle with psychiatric drugs will, I think, resonate strongly for many individuals who have been similarly mistreated.

But the important point is that this message is being publicized in a mainstream media outlet. Please take a look at this article, and pass it on to others.

The tide is coming in, and psychiatry’s bloated sandcastle is being washed away.

Behaviorism and Mental Health: Philip Hickey is a retired psychologist. He has worked in prisons (UK and US), addiction units, community mental health centers, nursing homes, and in private practice. He and his wife, Nancy, live in Colorado, and have four grown children. His posts can also be seen on his website, Behaviorism and Mental Health.

57 COMMENTS

There is no mystery as to why mainstream media has been slow to expose the mental health industry. Media these days is run by corporations for profit, and is more interested in entertaining populations to increase sales than to follow through with good investigative journalism. The corporate world is a large part of the problem of emotional distress and trauma. While we can blame psychiatry for all the distortions and abuses it has evolved, we also need to look at the underlying causes of growing emotional distress in society.
We live in a fractured society, where individuals and families get less and less support. Governments and the corporate world basically prefer people to just shut up and work, despite the stresses that individuals may have to deal with. No major institution is willing to look at how our society has to change to prevent emotional trauma. Institutions tend to look for simplistic solutions to complex issues. This is one reason why psychiatry has gotten away with bad medicine. The powers that be want people to be numbed and zombified, rather than having to deal with real issues. Even if the field of psychiatry collapses, it is likely that unless there is substantial social change, that people will still end up in emotional distress, with the corporate world finding some way to disregard people’s pain.

Pharmaceutical corporations are amongst the wealthiest in the U.S. , and well beyond… How do they make their obscene profits? Depending on the ignorance of the masses–Wouldn’t be happy with bad press, I should think.

I think the first order of business is dealing with institutional corruption. Harvard Law School professor, Lawrence Lessig, who helped create Harvard’s Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics’ lab on institutional corruption (where both Whitaker and Cosgrove served as Fellows). wrote the Forward to “Psychiatry Under the Influence”http://www.palgraveconnect.com/pc/doifinder/view/10.1057/9781137516022.0003

Also hard to imagine in our present circumstances that any major institution would look beyond the lucrative value of emotional trauma, and once noticing what a profitable market it is, may actually endeavor to pump up the emotional trauma — for business purposes.

Psychiatry gets away with bad medicine because no one in the medical community will reign it in—, or better, exile it. Psychiatrists aren’t about to rock the boat for each other, either. Bad medicine is a reflection of the status of the profession– Society doesn’t meddle much in medical matters, being ignorant of how science and medicine work– and all that, so psychiatry got away with what doctors may still think cannot be known, understood– least of all prosecuted by society. It’s a mistake, I think to believe psychiatry will get away with bad medicine– once it leaks out in the right places.

I am not afraid of the aftermath of the collapse of psychiatry — new frontiers can be daunting, but not so much so that a return to psychiatry would be anything more than stronger motivation to push forward.

“I think the first order of business is dealing with institutional corruption.”

Absolutely, and we need to connect the dots to show that mainstream psychiatry is merely the very worst of a bad lot (because of its coercive nature) and that corruption is sadly the norm. Think of the Volkswagen scandal, the GMO hoax, the fact that virtually all members of a panel responsible for formulating cholesterol guidelines had consulting gigs with statin makers. I just read today that the Consumer Product Safety Commission is finally taking aim at certain toxic chemicals in consumer products, over the objection of manufacturers (the “Better Living Through Chemistry” types). I am still waiting for a movement to dislodge the incredible power of the sugar lobby that makes it so difficult to buy food products without added sugar. Or to eliminate gluten as well as all toxic chemicals from our personal care products. Unregulated toxic chemicals and bad food are part of the harmful environment that is a causal factor in behavioral/mental distress. So yes, combating corruption is the first order of business, and it should be tied to the other incidents of corruption, to underscore that it is not just “those people” or “some people,” but all of us.

If a person has diabetes and stops taking their medication, they may become unwell. Similarly with schizoaffective disorder, if you stop taking your medication, you too may become unwell. This may not happen immediately, but may take 3 to 6 months.

The exact cause is not known, but we do know that there is a chemical imbalance in people affected by schizoaffective disorder….”

I don’t agree that ‘it’s’ like diabetes because diabetes exists, and you can’t recover from diabetes through careful insulin taper and practical psychotherapy.

There is a feedback form at the bottom of the page. I gave my feedback, and I encourage anyone else who has strong feelings on this to do the same. I quoted Harrow and Wunderlink, which would be great if others reinforce so they don’t think I’m just one “nutcase.”

I filled it out, too, pointing out the problems with psychiatrists regularly misdiagnosing drug withdrawal induced super sensitivity manic psychosis as a “return of symptoms” of the scientifically “invalid” DSM disorders. And pointing out that drug combinations, such as antipsychotics in conjunction with the antidepressants, can create anticholinergic toxidrome. And that the central symptoms of anticholinergic intoxication syndrome are almost identical to the positive symptoms of so called “schizophrenia,” thus are regularly misdiagnosed as well.

Psychiatry fits a social need. Its stated mission is to “treat mental illness.” Its actual purpose (I believe sociologists call this the “latent function”) is multi-faceted, but is mostly to keep people in line, maintain the status quo, and blind us all to the social factors that make many of us “crazy.” I sometimes think selling pills is really just a side benefit. Even before the bio-bio-bio perspective took hold, shrinks were essentially “blaming the victim.” “Therapy” can be just as damaging as drugs and shock in many respects.

As Norman pointed out, even is psychiatry is thoroughly debunked, there will emerge new ways of keeping us all in line…that is, unless there is serious social change. But who listens to “psychiatric survivors” ? Its like in Suddenly, Last Summer, when the evil aunt is about to have Catherine lobotomzied. The doc says something like “an operation may not stop the babbling,” and the evil aunt responds “but after the operation, who will listen?” Psychiatry helps discredit and control and silence people.

I think you’re very correct in saying that psychiatry’s purpose is something other that it’s purported purpose. Michel Foucault said as much. Psychiatry to him was a discipline. A discipline for dealing with people who messed up in other disciplines, for example, family, school, workplace, etc. Further more, it is the way the state imposes a certain version of reality on people who deviate from, or resist, its more standardized version of reality. The idea is that when people mess up in the home, in the community, at work, wherever, they can then be sent to the hospital and then either be made acceptable, or condemned as incorrigible, and therefore beyond redemption.

The real reason for the mental health system is punitive/corrective not medical. While the criminal justice system punishes people for breaking the law, the mental health system punishes people for not fitting in, for not producing, for, in other words, breaking rules that have not been written into law. The mental health system creates two laws where before we had one and, in this way, it fosters inequality, and for that reason it should be opposed. We don’t, in other words, need a law beyond the law, a law which would apply to some people but not others.

The other side of the coin is the use to which medical doctors had been put by the madhouse system. Once developing into a specialty, psychiatry, it has become important to find a physical reason for misbehavior. Why else send psychiatrists to medical school? If we are not dealing with diseases here, the psychiatrist is out of his element. The psychiatrist is out of his element anyway because none of the ailments that he tends happen to have a known physical source. If we’re not dealing with disease, the psychiatrist becomes redundant, that’s why he’s there. When the medicine is exposed as fraud? Major oops!

I guess I’ll just say “ditto” on all counts, no use essentially repeating what Frank said. I’d just add that when we collectively identify the nature of what we’re dealing with, i.e. a branch of the prison system and not a “helping profession” gone wrong, we will become more effective at developing the appropriate strategies and tactics necessary to defeat it.

I was one of the few who had their prescribing psychiatrist admit to my face he had totally screwed up diagnosing and drugging me. He did his best to discredit me later and I have a copy of the letter he wrote another pdco outlining my psychotic behavior when he knew it was a lie. I’ve learned to fly under the radar when dealing with doctors (still distrustful) and have never told them I was diagnosed to protect myself.

Who will listen?? Dragging out our so-called mental illness to debunk our credibility is being done daily. I was afraid of repercussions if I had spoken out and still am today of the labeling I’ve tried to hide.

Once again, Phil Hickey hits the nail on the head. And yes, it is really significant that a story like this appears in a widely-read mainstream newspaper like the Daily Mail. And what Phil didn’t mention is that the Daily Mail is not published by crusading radicals. It is an extremely conservative newspaper.

Meanwhile, just in the last week or so, the establishment liberal Huffington Post is running a 15-part, book length series about the various scandals around Risperdal. And a number of pretty establishment newspapers are writing in depth about the fake Study 329 that lied about the safety and effectiveness of Paxil used against children and adolescents. This was first exposed by the British Medical Journal.

All this is great, but we HAVE to have a movement that can follow up on this. It isn’t enough to have the facts out there, although that is extremely important. We have to have a vehicle to keep this in the public eye. Almost all other oppressed groups in our society have been able to get themselves together, and have made tremendous progress in gaining their rights. Why can’t we?

Change doesn’t happen overnight. Nor is it permanent – every right you win can be taken away from you if you’re not looking. The history of black movement is a testimony to that – the moment they managed to abolish one form of systemic abuse another one was created in its place. But still it’s getting better.

It is difficult for a non-visible minority to get organized because our society doesn’t want to recognize the problem. There can be an economic advantage to the governmental and corporate world to give more rights to some oppressed groups, but the corporate world still needs it’s slaves. The emotionally distressed are the new slaves. From a narrow minded business perspective what one wants to do with people who seem not to fit in, is to use them until they burn out and then discard them.
Other groups won rights when it was financially advantageous to our society to give them rights. The only advantage our corporate world can see for the emotionally traumatized is to create a mental health industry that makes billions while people continue to suffer.

I’m not sure how correct this is Norman. Keeping black people as slave labor was surely more financially advantageous (and persisted for hundreds of years). Freeing black people and giving them rights resulted in a loss of profit and power for white majorities.

Gay people are such a small group (only 1-2% of self-Americans self-identify as gay) and there is not so much direct economic advantage to oppressing or enslaving them. I don’t see a large financial advantage to giving them more rights.

With women, that’s a complicated situation. I’ll probably getting trouble for making generalized statements about that, but I think keeping women in the home and not allowing them to vote/work did for a period have economic advantages for white men. On the other hand, letting more women work/giving them rights was also economically advantageous.

The sad thing is that in the long run, better psychosocial support and less medication would result in more emotionally suffering people able to work and contribute, thus helping the economy. But that cannot be perceived in a world of short-term next-quarter profit based thinking. Perhaps it could be more clearly presented in some way how much it damages the economy over decades to have millions of emotionally distressed people unable to work or buy merchandise (outside of pills). It has to be a small but significant contributor to the scary $19 trillion levels of debt. It must be getting worse too.

Also, “our society” is not a person. Perhaps you mean mostly powerful mostly white men who run private corporations and the government, and their subordinates whose activities are controlled by those men.

I agree. Clearly child abuse and trauma ends up being very costly, both emotionally and financially to our society. Unfortunately, our society is not yet prepared to invest in an creating an emotionally healthier society, and sees only the short term cost, and not the long term gain in making the investment.
Certainly giving some groups more rights has changed the balance of financial power, but I thin these groups won rights both through effort, but also as there was some financial benefit overall to society.

There is a letter and slide presentation on-line , by David Healy, titled: “Global Business Masquerading as a Science”- it is one the best explanations for all the things you blame on society’s shortcomings–

Anyone who researches the marketing of biomedical model psychiatry is stunned by the close relationship between pharma and psychiatry– achieving power/wealth by “changing minds”–

It is no accident or mere coincide that people began to suspect that their inability to cope was due to something wrong with them, as magic bullets for mental illness were being mass produced. The problem is not about what just can’t be changed within society. the problem is that psychiatry is an institution , an empire– it is draining the resources and the life out of society. At the moment we, the people appear helpless, but I promise you that is going to change.

People can only solve their problems when they know what lay a the root of them. Maybe you think the mainstream media is the gatekeeper of public knowledge? I mean, yes there are barriers, but they are by no means insurmountable.

Do the math. What does it cost us to fund the MH system? In dollars and cents. Factor in tax payer funded involuntary commitment, the drugs– OMG– just the cost of the drugs is mind boggling. (pun intended). I contend that $$ could be used to resolve many of the issues that are now like a conveyor belt to a psych ward.

Here’s my anecdotal evidence. During my 40 year nursing career, I can count on one hand, the number of people who say they were helped by psychiatry- Three were hospitalized in the early 70’s at Westwood Lodge in Silver Springs Maryland. Then there are roughly 20,000 other patients I have met– ages 3 years to 102 years who were adamant in their disdain for the psychiatric treatment they received. Hundreds were severely harmed, some have not recovered from the damage of locked ward involuntary treatment. I know of 10 who committed suicide, though I am sure there are many more I have not heard about. I don’t recall a single instance when a teen was admitted following a suicide attempt– some of whom survived by miracles, literally; as I recall all of these kids had psych labels, took psych drugs and/or had previous locked ward involuntary admission.

Yes, I know, the data shows a much brighter outcome for psychiatric treatment– millions are helped, leading fuller lives–. and so on. Still, I will use my remaining time on the planet, disregarding what the expert psychiatrists claim, and do my best to honor those I now know were tortured in the name of greed, not science–and certainly not medicine.

Psychiatric surviviours have many things that distinguish them from other marginalized groups. We face a lot of the same problems that other oppressed groups but in many ways our position is worse. Even the sheer idea that we are crazy so what we say is always to be questioned – even if it’s an obvious fact like 2+2=4. You of course face this kind of dismissal when you’re black or a woman or another minority but it’s not as intrinsically linked to the society’s definition of who you are. Also we’re not easily recognizable – it’s hard to hide you’re black but anyone who’s escaped the system can blend in the crowd. It’s a good protective mechanism and few people want to risk being hauled back for their activism. You can hide it so you often don’t have to face it. People of colour are forced to organize by the fact they wear their skin and there’s no such escape from the system. Being black or homosexual or a woman is a part of one’s core identity, one that you’re born with. Being a mental patient is a false identity installed in you by the masters of mankind and therefore is not so easily turned into strength. “Mad pride” doesn’t really resonate with people because many of us don’t consider ourselves “mad” and for good reasons. “Psychiatric surviviour” is a better organizing identity in this respect. There are many subtle differences that make us much more difficult to organize.

“Almost all other oppressed groups in our society have been able to get themselves together, and have made tremendous progress in gaining their rights. Why can’t we?”

Because there is really no permanent and culturally embedded unifying factor, here. Race and ethnicity are not flexible, they don’t change over time. And usually, gay is gay for life (although this isn’t always the case, but by and large, one politically aligns as gay-identified, as a lifelong lifestyle).

Emotional distress, abuse, and oppression cross all the boundaries, regardless of gender, race, class, or sexual orientation. People heal from emotional distress, and that changes their outlook. That is in constant flux, so it is hard to identify one way or another. I think that’s why cohesion is so hard to achieve. At this point, it’s not clear to me at all who this movement actually represents, and whom it stands to benefit.

I see the gay rights movement as the most successful since it got going. These are the group that continually achieve what they’re entitled to. It’s not so long ago since they were part of the loonies.

We come from all walks so it’s about Civil Rights, maybe. For example we’re entitled to the same as everyone else in a lot of areas but we are not allowed the rights we have.

If I was discriminated against because I’m Irish I would be able to apply my rights. If I’m discriminated against because of my historic record
I’m entitled to object but my experience is that I can be sucessfully blocked.

I think this movement is successful for two reasons – they have money and Dick Cheney’s daughter is lesbian. I mean that only partly tongue in cheek – the fact that homosexuality can “afflict” even the members of the ruling class is a good enough reason to give them rights. If you’re a white rich old man you’re more likely to discover your son’s gay than that he’s black. And if he happens to go “crazy” you’ll find a way to keep him away from psychiatry (unless abusing him is what you want).

Exactly. Psychiatry is an all-encompassing system of abuse. It targets all oppressed groups plus some random victims just because it can.

Fighting against psychiatry is not like fighting against racism – it’s like fighting against racism and sexism, and corporatism and bigotry and…so on and so forth. Many groups have successfully managed to escape being in it’s clutches en masse – there’s no drapetomania and homosexuality is not a “mental illness”. Still these groups get psychiatrised more often. For these groups there’s a survival advantage to differentiate between themselves and “mad for other reasons” to convince the general public they deserve the rights.

Racism, sexism, homophobia are forms of oppression fostered under capitalism which are reinforced — or enforced — by psychiatry, which functions to protect whatever power structure it is serving at the time. (And before someone mentions the USSR, psychiatry was serving the interests of counterrevolution there too.)

I don’t see anyone running away. It’s simply complicated. People commenting here are from different cities, states and even continents so it’s intrinsically difficult to organize any real life action which does require something else than using internet/phone/mail.

It is interesting why more psychiatric survivors do not create groups or lead movements to change the system. Maybe many of them are poor or remain relatively poor after they get out of the system, and so lack the funds, time or energy to organize. Perhaps they want nothing more to do with the system and just want to live their life. Perhaps they are scared of judgment by their employer or those in their new life if they reveal their history in the “mental illness” system.

For myself, I don’t want people at my work or in the community I live to know what happened to me or to have any reason to question my ability to do the work I do now. Otherwise I would be more visible and do more activism.

I think a good idea is to try to appeal to the self-interest of those in power in some way that also serves the interest of psychiatric survivors/sufferers, but I am not sure how this could be done. Replicating the Open Dialogue approach and then presenting these results to those making the decisions would be one way. Below is another study that saved Holland significant money and that could potentially be replicated.

I think a good idea is to try to appeal to the self-interest of those in power in some way that also serves the interest of psychiatric survivors/sufferers, but I am not sure how this could be done.

Can you identify any significant commonalities between the two? Serious question. I can’t.

Generally those who rule have a better understanding of their self-interest than we do, as they have been in power for some time and have no illusions, as does the populace at large, that capitalism has something to do with “principles” other than the bottom line. They know where their power comes from and have no intentions of surrendering it no matter what argument you might make.

It’s hard to see much in common between wealthy older white men of the political class and mostly minority, poor, younger psychiatric sufferers. That’s why I think the best idea is to stay away from the psychiatric system at all costs, since change does not look likely to come soon.

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. If people stay away from psychiatry, two things happen. Firstly, they will be infinitely better off; and secondly, psychiatry will wither from neglect and lack of interest.

The most effective psychosocial program is a socially integrated society and culture, where people are connected and “It Takes a Village” is a way of life. I believe that is one major reason why the so-called developing countries have better mental health outcomes than we in the west do. The fact that they do not drug distress is clearly a huge factor, but even in countries where drugging is a way of life, social connection makes a big difference. It was reported (on MIA) that psychiatric hospitalizations went way down during the Christchurch, NZ earthquake a few years ago, showing that wonderful things can happen when people come together. When people in distress or in altered states, are embraced, accepted and understood — not shunned, feared, excluded and pathologized — when that attitude and outlook becomes second nature, as individuals and society, opportunistic psychiatry will lose its power. As it stands, many suffer in silence and, upon recovery, are often (understandably) not eager to subject themselves to the stigma and rejection that continues to haunt those with mental illness labels and their families.

The great mystery in all of this is why has the mainstream media been so slow to pick up the story.

Methinks you indulge in a bit of irony here. There is, of course, no mystery. The function of the corporate media is to obfuscate on behalf of the power structure and keep the people mystified. It is, in fact, serving a very similar function to psychiatry itself. It is simply not in the interest of this system to encourage conscious thought.

The fact that some good information is finding itself into the “MSM” is encouraging. At this point it is the exception which proves the rule. However when we start to achieve some critical mass, factions of the ruling class may decide to cut their losses vis. a vis. psychiatry and may even collaborate in hastening its demise. By then the corporate media will sense a sea change and all we’ll have to do is send them a press release for them to show up. But as I said before, be careful what you wish for.

“I think a good idea is to try to appeal to the self-interest of those in power in some way that also serves the interest of psychiatric survivors/sufferers, but I am not sure how this could be done.”

I have been thinking about this, too. I believe that the people, united by the same goal and sense of purpose are the most powerful — What has not happened yet, is the crisis that puts us all in the same boat–. Well the crisis is happening, it just isn’t very well known– yet.
This magnitude of corruption evidenced in the historical background and current responses by leading academic psychiatrists who authored Paxil Study 329 , is one thing, but we are seeing– if we want to take the time to study the documents on study329.org , the degree to which doctors who play a major role influencing medical practice guidelines, mainly drug treatments,; academic psychiatrists especially, have depraved indifference toward the suffering of patients, in this case children and adolescents. Don’t you think this is a message *the people* need to get?

Next issue would be the cover ups, lies, passing the buck, etc that is happening even now, when study 329 has been restored– . If nothing else, the fact that none of the original 22 authors saw the data– probably have no idea what to make of it anyway, speaks volumes on the incompetence on the part of the “best of the best in child/adolescent mental health in all of North America”. Don’t you think the people need to know that the top of the child psych food chain is unethical, incompetent and has yet to demonstrate even the slightest concern for the kids who were harmed in the damn drug trial?Let alone the millions who came after them…I think this should be front page news. Why? Because psychiatry has attached itself to kids like white on rice– This is a point I consider relevant, and in the best interest of the people, this message needs to get out.

Which ghost written article on any RCT published in any professional medical journal can be trusted? Pharma still does not release the clinical patient data on the subjects in the trial. Do you have any idea what it took for this team to get hold of the heavily guarded secrets of Paxil Study 329? Hello? If medicine is practiced based on the guidelines for treatment, based on the results of RCTs– and it is, actually, so I will go ahead and say, everyone is basically a guinea pig– Just so happens it is psychiatry doing the most damage for the greatest profits–. The information on the web site Study329.org– combined with numerous posts by Mickey Nardo on 1boringoldman and David Healy on RxISK.org is the course work for a public campaign.

Any practicing MD who is not up in arms over the state of things regarding safe, effective treatments/pharmaceuticals– is either on Pharma’s payroll, or cooling their heels unperturbed, comfortable in the ultimate authority role that is considered a right of passage in the MD brotherhood. Are the majority of doctors willing to play Russian roulette with the lives of their patients and their medical license? Well– so long as it isn’t public knowledge….?? Amazing, isn’t it?

Oh, Norman, please stop blaming *society*. Society isn’t writing the prescriptions. Doctors are. Society would not be OK with being a market of gullible lab rats for the medical profession. Are Doctors OK with pushing whatever Pharma is selling today? On whomever is easiest to coerce–? So what if the number of educated consumers are on the rise? Kids, the elderly, anyone with a psych dx/label– ALL fair game for forced drugging/incarceration– . Be great if psychiatry just did its part reducing the stress we are overwhelmed by– instead of harping on how it needs to exist because we are so stressed out! Broken record– lame excuse.

Psychiatrists duped? Not a valid excuse anymore– . Never should have been — unless you subscribe to the notion that a medical degree is like “sucker” stamped on a doctor’s forehead. Nope– they know better– even psychiatrists knew damn well they were clueless about complex biological processes. Rubber stamping brain altering drugs as cures for brain disorders/diseases? Give me a break- you think they did not know how ignorant they were about neurotransmitters- chemistry, biochemistry? Well, the drug reps sure spotted it. And no one is saying: For crying out loud– ! IF a psychiatrist had a grasp of the *workings of the brain* he sure as hell would spot the flaws in the sales pitch for magic bullet psych drugs. Turns out, only a handful of psychiatrists did– spot the flaws. One is Mickey Nardo, who practiced Internal Medicine for a few years before going into psych–the psychoanalysis , talk therapy branch that has all but disappeared. Anyway, Dr. Nardo is a Real Doctor of Medicine– hence, the grasp of SCIENCE. David Healy is a data medicine specialist – hence, the bells and whistles regarding RCTs – first used by psychiatrists, RCTs became the gold standard when their payoffs reached into the millions–Of course now, we’re talking, billions $$$$
(meet the other real doctors practicing psychiatry, who spotted the BS passing for medical literature, they are on the RIAT team that desired study329.)

There is a message waiting to be disseminated in as many ways as there are individuals who care about kids, our future, or even just their own behinds.
I think it was Cat who requested a Manifesto to coalesce a movement– ? I am working on one–

It’s no accident that the Daily Mail picked up the story when it affected Luke Montagu, “heir to the Earl of Sandwich”. It it affects Mary living down the street (and down the street is social housing or immigrant neighbourhood) nobody gives a sh*t.

Re: The great mystery in all of this is why has the mainstream media been so slow to pick up the story.

Well after reporting it, taking station breaks for advertisements for antidepressants and sedatives might give big media editors and producers indigestion, since their very existence depends on drug company sponsorship. Ask your doctor about the latest side effects will kill you pill.

“…For example, they suggest advances in science – such as new techniques to identify genes that put people at risk – should help kick-start the development of new treatments…”

“….A lead researcher, Prof Til Wykes, from King’s College London, said: “The impact of mental disorders is rising – now we have the science to bridge these gaps, funding mental health research will benefit everyone in the long run – in health and wellbeing as well as financially….”

Strangely enough the Dail Mail is the only paper worth reading in the uk as u get these sort of articles but don’t expect any follow up, the truth does come out but sinks without trace.

It’s a fascist state and the state kills millions every year with drugs, deliberately, with chemo being notable, and psychiatry close behind, with vaccination being the main creator of disease, eg autism, with 500,000 asd cases in the uk last time i looked, and vaccination never saved one single life, eliminated any disease, or prevented any, it’s the real foundation stone of the matrix, and 200 years of death & disease dealing to it’s name

Actually vaccination has if not saved, then very much improved my life curing me of recurrent painful tonsil inflammations and other respiratory tract bacterial infections.
Don’t throw all the medicine under the bus.

It’s shocking the number of vaccinations given to children, who often have dozens by the time they leave grade school. Now they’re guilt-tripping and actually forcing people to drug their children, equating vaccination with immunization in the public mind. And while they are talking about real diseases, much of the semantic obfuscation is similar.